3 ms·

I 100% honest to god cannot tell the difference between a Palworld creature and a Pokemon. Unless it is holding a gun? Even then it could just be a photoshop of

I 100% honest to god cannot tell the difference between a Palworld creature and a Pokemon. Unless it is holding a gun? Even then it could just be a photoshop of a Pokemon for all I know. I think the vast majority of people would also be confused between the two. The company behind Palworld have done other games that are extremely close knock-offs of existing games. I do think this is wrong and can confuse potential buyers. This isn't fair use satire.

cstrahan 2y ago
The same could be said of Pokemon vs Digimon. Put the two side-by-side and I wouldn't be able to discern which is which. Same with Bakugan, Monsuno, Yu-Gi-Oh, Card Fight!! Vanguard, Future Card Buddyfight, Shadowverse, etc. I don't really see what the problem is. If Nintendo was just a little less out of touch with what their fan base wanted, they could be raking in (even more) cash. But instead of doing that, they waste their resources getting butthurt over the silliest things, like people posting game play videos of humorous single player ROM hacks of games no longer being sold (they have successfully removed more YouTube videos like this than I count by sending DMCA take downs -- its ridiculous). More focus on innovating and less focus on litigation would do them (and their fan base) well. It's not Palworld's fault that Nintendo et al choose to release horribly unoptimized, not fun Pokemon games (like Pokemon Scarlet and Violet). I think it's great that a competitor in the monster-capture game genre is providing an actually fun game, because despite the enormity of the Pokemon fan base and the massive financial incentive to deliver a compelling game to them, clearly Nintendo either can't or simply won't do it.
- flumpcakes 2y ago
  I understand the argument but I can tell the difference between Pokémon/Digimon/Yu-Gi-Oh. I think Palworld copies the aesthetic too much. If it was just in the same 'genre' of fighting monsters like Digimon and Pokémon then I think it would have been OK. I feel like they are trying to mislead consumers, especially young children.

cstrahan 2y ago

The same could be said of Pokemon vs Digimon. Put the two side-by-side and I wouldn't be able to discern which is which. Same with Bakugan, Monsuno, Yu-Gi-Oh, Card Fight!! Vanguard, Future Card Buddyfight, Shadowverse, etc. I don't really see what the problem is. If Nintendo was just a little less out of touch with what their fan base wanted, they could be raking in (even more) cash. But instead of doing that, they waste their resources getting butthurt over the silliest things, like people posting game play videos of humorous single player ROM hacks of games no longer being sold (they have successfully removed more YouTube videos like this than I count by sending DMCA take downs -- its ridiculous). More focus on innovating and less focus on litigation would do them (and their fan base) well. It's not Palworld's fault that Nintendo et al choose to release horribly unoptimized, not fun Pokemon games (like Pokemon Scarlet and Violet). I think it's great that a competitor in the monster-capture game genre is providing an actually fun game, because despite the enormity of the Pokemon fan base and the massive financial incentive to deliver a compelling game to them, clearly Nintendo either can't or simply won't do it.

flumpcakes 2y ago
I understand the argument but I can tell the difference between Pokémon/Digimon/Yu-Gi-Oh. I think Palworld copies the aesthetic too much. If it was just in the same 'genre' of fighting monsters like Digimon and Pokémon then I think it would have been OK. I feel like they are trying to mislead consumers, especially young children.